David Brauer scribed, in part: >>>>> For the "richer" schools, then, the AYP/NCLB list is more a marketing stigma than a financial one. "Poorer" schools face tougher penalties.
<<<<< I agree with that assessment. So, schools without adequate resources find that they are further stigmatized and have more resources withdrawn, leaving them to struggle on to do more with less...... is that correct? Another fundamental flaw with NCLB as I understand it, is that the plan stigmatizes schools without addressing the specific learner populations served by schools, without taking specific learner needs into account, and without taking into account any long-term strategies to help bring learners from where they are to where they need to be in terms "grade level achievement." Various learners have various needs, and NCLB as a "one-size-fits-all" scheme of testing and prescription seems to be a poor approach. Many Minneapolis schools have unique populations of students who need a curriculum and plan tailored to their learning needs -- whether because of language issues or issues related to poverty or family troubles or or even cultural issues. It seems to me that while it is not cheap to address these issues, it is far better in both the short and long runs to do whatever it takes to educate all children well than to leave children with one or more specific learning issues behind. While we are losing teachers due to a desire to be rid of higher-paid folks with seniority, and losing schools due to district "contraction," my perception is that NCLB will also be another means to cut funding where it is needed the most. My percetion is that poor students and minority students will be hit the hardest, and hit the most often by what amounts to a punitive plan. Am I wrong? Do other list members have more familiarity with NCLB and how it will actually impact Minneapolis Public Schools? Like most list members, I'm running to keep up with a variety of demands as a parent, spouse, citizen, and working person -- I'd appreciate more info and perspective as well. I remain deeply concerned about NCLB, especially as the program was passed with the promise of full funding, and then defunded at the federal level. Doesn't that leave local folks holding the bag to fund the changes forced by NCLB? If fewer of our federal tax dollars come back to fund federally-mandated education changes in our district, doesn't that mean we have to be taxed again at the local level just to keep up? Still bewildered and deeply concerned about this..... -- but pedalling for peace and ecojustice, and to earn a buck or two in the neighborhood -- Gary Hoover REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
